This guy really loves his bike!

I saw that item on the BBC news pages yesterday but I couldn't understand why it was there as the piece was dated November 2007.

Tom

I am gobsmacked to learn that this unfortunate man has been taken to court and is to be placed on the sex offenders register. His behaviour harmed no one, and he was a threat to no one. What he did, he did in the privacy of his own room. What a gross invasion of his human rights.

Whilst being quite fond of my bicycle, I have not found the need to have sex with it. However, should I change my mind, I would feel that it concerned nobody but myself. If a person is not entitled to privacy in his own room, where is he entitled to ? I challenge anyone to say that everything that they have ever done in private would pass public scrutiny, especially by people of this mentality.

Edited June 2, 201411 yr by neptune

I am gobsmacked to learn that this unfortunate man has been taken to court and is to be placed on the sex offenders register. His behaviour harmed no one, and he was a threat to no one. What he did, he did in the privacy of his own room. What a gross invasion of his human rights.

That's what I thought. Yes, a little odd to have sex with your bike but in the privacy of his own room this should never have gone to court.

I am gobsmacked to learn that this unfortunate man has been taken to court and is to be placed on the sex offenders register. His behaviour harmed no one, and he was a threat to no one. What he did, he did in the privacy of his own room. What a gross invasion of his human rights.

 

Whilst being quite fond of my bicycle, I have not found the need to have sex with it. However, should I change my mind, I would feel that it concerned nobody but myself. If a person is not entitled to privacy in his own room, where is he entitled to ? I challenge anyone to say that everything that they have ever done in private would pass public scrutiny, especially by people of this mentality.

I thought exactly the same. Surely something in the story doesn't add up. It would be different if he had made the gestures at the women, or did he start doing it after they entered his room?

If the law is like Oz, if you can be observed even in your own home it is an offense.

So at least make sure the blinds are closed if you are so inclined

He was in a room with the door locked.

Can you imagine being in a hotel room with your wife/girlfriend for a romantic weekend. You were getting down to business when there's a knock at the door. You carry on. The next thing, the door bursts open and there's a couple of cleaners there. What have you done wrong that would put you on a sex offenders register?

@[uSER=4366]d8veh[/uSER]. You just can`t be too careful these days you know. In the scenario you describe, it would be advisable to take certain precautions. Use only the State Approved Missionary Position. Your hands, and those of your partner must remain on the pillow, so as to be clearly visible from the doorway at all times. A few copies of "Pregnancy Weekly" and "trying for a Baby" should be strewn around as an alibi.

Keep one foot on the floor. The act itself should be restricted to fifteen to thirty seconds. Your partner must keep her eyes closed, and of course her legs. She should be silent, and it is her duty to lay back and think of England.

This sort of abuse of individual freedom and rights has come about with the introduction of the Sex Offences Act, 2003. The three largest countries in the EU, Germany, France and Italy, whose citizens are also affected have declared that this act breaches UK and EU law and they are backed by the European Court and even our own High Court is unhappy with it. This is what is behind David Cameron's wish to get rid of the Human Rights Act and replace it with his own so called Bill of Rights, since the main breach of rights is against the rights act. He was just using Abu Hamza as an excuse.

A sample of that idiotically illegal Sex Offences Act from the sentencing guidelines is Section 2B.

Under that any non-sexual touching of a child is liable to a guideline sentence of 26 weeks prison if the child is under 13. The sentencing range for the judges discretion is 4 weeks to 18 months. Up to a year and a half for touching an under 13 year old's arm or shoulder for example if permission was not asked first! This is why medics, teachers etc often ask a child first if it's ok to touch, it's for their own safety.

And for this as for any other so called sex offence, being placed on the sex offenders register is mandatory, the periods anything from 3 to 7 years for these lesser "offences".

Of course the chance of being prosecuted for an innocent touch is small, but this shows how if suspicion is aroused by someone or if a false accusation is made, the innocent accused person is very likely to be convicted and imprisoned.

The outcome of this silly law is that it's very difficult to get any man to work with children. Despite every effort primary school children are being almost exclusively taught by females, and boys doing scouting more often than not have female scout leaders. The authorities know and have said this is an unhealthy way to raise children, especially in these days of so many single mothers, but the damage is done, It would take many years to reverse the situation and there's no signs of the government doing anything other than more damage.

I can't see what all the fuss is about, it's just some guy shagging his bike, I mean, we've all done it, right?

I wouldn't know which way was right.

Was it a 'mounting bike'

I've seen those in Facebook ads. I thought it was a mis-spelling of mountain bikes, but now I get it. I think I might get one then, but I'm a bit worried about why they often come with a puncher. I'm not really in to that sort of thing.

I wouldn't know which way was right.

Start with a hybrid.

Adult size of course!

The town bike is fine neptune...

_____________________

my site:Fifa coins

At least these ones have taken precautions:

http://tbtriathlon.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/dsc_5498.jpg